Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization

A collection of NET's best and most memorable threads. Predictions, debates, laughs, and X's & O's. Rating: PG to NC-17
Charlie Whitehurst TRADED TO SEATTLE.
Wed Mar 17, 2010 1:44 pm
  • SEA and SD swap 2010 2nd round picks. (40 to 60)

    SEA sends a 2011 3rd round pick to SD.

    SEA recieves QB Charlie Whitehurst.
    User avatar
    Dr Spaceman
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 14
    Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:19 pm


  • Source?
    _______________________
    Remember, it's all for fun.
    User avatar
    Hawkstorian
    * NET Staff *
     
    Posts: 2909
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 11:19 am
    Location: Spokane


  • Clayton and company are discussing on 710 ESPN as we speak.
    User avatar
    Dr Spaceman
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 14
    Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:19 pm


  • That's a pretty stiff price. A 3rd rounder for a 3rd string QB is more than usual. Add in dropping 20 spots in round 2 and that's an awful lot of value the Bolts just got.

    He better compete for the starting job....and win.
    Last edited by seattlesetters on Wed Mar 17, 2010 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    seattlesetters
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 564
    Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 3:45 pm


  • Ouch....
    User avatar
    the ditch
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 1592
    Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:05 am
    Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada


  • Bummer on the compensation. Arizona did a nice job driving up the price on us, considering all the other cheap QB movement this year. But if the Hawks front office doesn't see any QBs in the draft worth taking, which I agree with for the most part, and think Whitehurst can be a starter so be it. I just think San Diego has to be tooting their horn after this move..
    Tall men come down to my height when I hit 'em in the body.

    Jack Dempsey
    User avatar
    Fuzzman55
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1572
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 3:10 pm


  • Wow. I expected a better deal.
    User avatar
    ErikG803
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 977
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:53 pm


  • Hawkstorian wrote:Source?


    So basically, the team gave up an end of the 2nd round pick in total for Whitehurst. At least according to Sando's math:

    http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/15707/seahawks-betting-big-on-whitehurst
    Last edited by drdiags on Wed Mar 17, 2010 1:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    Image
    Leon Washington 2010-2012 Red Bryant 2008-2013 Chris Clemons 2010-2013 Golden Tate 2010-2013
    Brandon Browner 2011-2013 Breno Giacomini 2011-2013 - Gone but not forgotten.
    R.I.P Les "PithyRadish" Norton 9/13/2014
    User avatar
    drdiags
    * The Doc *
    * The Doc *
     
    Posts: 9207
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:33 am
    Location: Covington, Washington


  • so what does this mean for Matt
    AshamanMat
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 316
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 12:42 am
    Location: Utah


  • OMG, here comes a bunch of new Mocks! :mrgreen:
    I like the player and I want to bring him in,,
    ,,just show me the Starfax.
    User avatar
    woofu
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 575
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 3:11 am


  • Wow, well another year without a 3rd rounder.
    Skittles - The candy of champions.
    User avatar
    Seahawksfan425
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1267
    Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:32 pm
    Location: Kenmore, WA


  • Ugh, I was really enjoying the fact we had pick 40. We dropped a ton of slots down to nearly Round 3.
    80% of Planet Earth is covered by water.....The rest is covered by EARL THOMAS!
    Image
    User avatar
    SundayNiteBlackout
    National Guard 09-Present
     
    Posts: 1070
    Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 12:43 pm
    Location: Seattle, WA


  • Man I like Whitehurst, but man did we give up a lot and only a 2 year deal...
    Image
    User avatar
    Blitzer88
    * NET Eeyore *
     
    Posts: 11033
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
    Location: Pasco, WA


  • What a rip off. I'm sorry, but it is. We get a 7th for Wallace next year, a guy who while not great has actual game experience and is a decent game manager. Then we trade this much for a guy he hasn't even played a down? This team is buying high and selling low.
    User avatar
    razor150
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1815
    Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:22 am


  • I don't mean to be a cynic, I really don't, but I hope our coaches/FO know stuff about Whitehurst that we don't.

    Moving from 40-60 is kinda big in this draft (IMO) and trading a 2011 3rd seems hefty for a guy that's taken 4 snaps in the regular season.

    Oh well. Hopefully it ends up being a bargain.
    “We need to be challenged, ... and we need to be under the gun to respond.” --Pete Carroll
    User avatar
    nanomoz
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4608
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:20 pm
    Location: UT


  • if they really expected him to take over for matt after this year or even this year it should have been longer than 2 years.
    User avatar
    DrinkinTheLimerade
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 105
    Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:52 am
    Location: Seattle


  • this deal sounds like prison sex.
    User avatar
    OneLofaTatupu
    * NET Shrink *
     
    Posts: 1560
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:04 pm
    Location: Seattle, WA


  • If he becomes a successful starting QB for the Seahawks, then the price is fine (could even be a great price), but that's a big IF. From the Charger's side, they got a great price for him....and we got a 7th round pick for trading our backup.
    User avatar
    chihawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 369
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:38 pm


  • and we get shafted yet again.
    hburn21
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1369
    Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 3:50 pm


  • Don't like it. The 3rd rounder in 2011 seems like enough. I hate moving back 20 picks in round 2 this year.
    G-Money
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 48
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:58 am


  • I think Matt is done, but holy crap, that's a hefty price for a journeyman QB. The difference between early second round and late second round is huge in this draft.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11258
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • We traded a 4th rounder (equivalent to a 3rd next year) and dropped 20 spots in the second (a difference of 200 points per the value chart = to the 78th pick overall, which is a 3rd rounder). I think we overpaid considering this guy is completely unproven.
    Image
    User avatar
    Mckinja
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 2797
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:31 am
    Location: Auburn, WA


  • Wonder how this affects us still chasing Marshall since we have now ridded ourselves of our near 1st round pick.
    User avatar
    DrinkinTheLimerade
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 105
    Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:52 am
    Location: Seattle


  • I'm baffled.
    _______________________
    Remember, it's all for fun.
    User avatar
    Hawkstorian
    * NET Staff *
     
    Posts: 2909
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 11:19 am
    Location: Spokane


  • not pleased with this deal whatsoever...
    _____________________

    Where can I find Seahawks98.com???
    User avatar
    Barthawk
    *Bacon Eating Crusader*
    *Bacon Eating Crusader*
     
    Posts: 2559
    Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:17 am
    Location: San Antonio, TX by way of Kalispell, MT


  • Matt will have to compete to start now. :thfight7:
    I like the player and I want to bring him in,,
    ,,just show me the Starfax.
    User avatar
    woofu
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 575
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 3:11 am


  • Seems a bit steep for someone to backup Matt, so I'm gonna assume that he's the starter.
    I hate Tim Ruskell.
    User avatar
    Trrrroy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2843
    Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 9:24 am


  • It's a big risk to put this kind of investment in a guy when he hasn't shown it on the field, but I think it's exciting to finally have the guy that our front office thinks will be our next franchise QB on the roster. It'll be fun to see what happens with this.
    User avatar
    Rat
    * NET Cynic *
     
    Posts: 3512
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:42 pm
    Location: St. Louis, MO


  • I agree Matt is done with this franchise. This move doesn't make any sense unless Whitehurst is coming to be the starter. Guys like Lefevour and Tebow could have been had for less as developmental QBs.
    Tall men come down to my height when I hit 'em in the body.

    Jack Dempsey
    User avatar
    Fuzzman55
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1572
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 3:10 pm


  • If he isnt the starter in Week 1 - Carroll and Schneider should be fired.
    User avatar
    iigakusei
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 870
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 6:14 am


  • smh booooooooooo this guy better be the second coming or imma hate him til hes off the team
    Image
    3elieve
    User avatar
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 19119
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • The good news is that we still have the same number of picks this year. The bad news is that's a pretty steep price. Seems to suggest to me that they're seriously looking at Whitehurst as starter material. I'm starting to think that they'll be quietly shopping Hass around between now and the draft.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8029
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • Agreed with everyone, way too much compensation, what were they thinking.
    User avatar
    the ditch
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 1592
    Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:05 am
    Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada


  • The thing that is particularly strange with this is the report that we are signing him to a 2-year deal. If they think he is the future QB for the team, why would this only be a 2-year deal?
    User avatar
    chihawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 369
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:38 pm


  • This guy better be the 2nd coming of Dan Marino.

    I much would've preferred we give up say, our 4th and 5th round picks this year. I seriously think they overpaid.
    Image
    Sturm
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2345
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 3:11 pm


  • Yeah, really... if we gave up this much with the intentions of Hasselbeck being our starter... I won't go as far as to say I lost all trust in PC/Schneider, but it'd be hanging by a thread.

    I am excited to get someone new in there. Hopefully he's the right guy.
    User avatar
    ErikG803
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 977
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:53 pm


  • chihawk wrote:The thing that is particularly strange with this is the report that we are signing him to a 2-year deal. If they think he is the future QB for the team, why would this only be a 2-year deal?


    That is the biggest question...it makes no sense for a two year deal.
    User avatar
    iigakusei
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 870
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 6:14 am


  • chihawk wrote:The thing that is particularly strange with this is the report that we are signing him to a 2-year deal. If they think he is the future QB for the team, why would this only be a 2-year deal?


    That's the thing. We've given up high draft picks for only 2 years of a guy who won't even start the first year.
    _______________________
    Remember, it's all for fun.
    User avatar
    Hawkstorian
    * NET Staff *
     
    Posts: 2909
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 11:19 am
    Location: Spokane


  • Mckinja wrote:We traded a 4th rounder (equivalent to a 3rd next year) and dropped 20 spots in the second (a difference of 200 points per the value chart = to the 78th pick overall, which is a 3rd rounder). I think we overpaid considering this guy is completely unproven.


    According to Sando's article we gave up approx 270 points, which he puts as a end of the Second round pick. So low 2nd to mid-3rd is the range. Looking worse case, the team gave up to 2nd round value for Charlie's rights. At this point either is steep considering, so it doesn't bode well for the FO so far. I dread what the Marshall deal will end up looking like.
    Image
    Leon Washington 2010-2012 Red Bryant 2008-2013 Chris Clemons 2010-2013 Golden Tate 2010-2013
    Brandon Browner 2011-2013 Breno Giacomini 2011-2013 - Gone but not forgotten.
    R.I.P Les "PithyRadish" Norton 9/13/2014
    User avatar
    drdiags
    * The Doc *
    * The Doc *
     
    Posts: 9207
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:33 am
    Location: Covington, Washington


  • the ditch wrote:Agreed with everyone, way too much compensation, what were they thinking.


    They were probably thinking that Hass sucks, and Whitehurst has the ability to be a starter. I hope they're right, at least about Whitehurst.
    I hate Tim Ruskell.
    User avatar
    Trrrroy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2843
    Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 9:24 am


  • Man, most of these moves look really suspect.

    I really hope Carroll and Co. know what they're doing. I'm willing to give them a shot, see how this all looks on the field... But these moves are head scratchers.
    Sarlacc, on comparing .NET to Soccer: And why not? It's a bunch of people running around in circles, feigning pain, and never scoring.
    Snohomie
    * NET Draft Guru *
     
    Posts: 3591
    Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:06 pm
    Location: Bellingham, WA



  • Trrrroy wrote:
    the ditch wrote:Agreed with everyone, way too much compensation, what were they thinking.


    They were probably thinking that Hass sucks, and Whitehurst has the ability to be a starter. I hope they're right, at least about Whitehurst.


    Fair enough. I guess we'll find out if he has the ability to be a starter or not.
    User avatar
    the ditch
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 1592
    Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:05 am
    Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada


  • Un-proven and hes not that young... I don't get it.
    User avatar
    RodeoChihuahua
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 30
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 12:57 am
    Location: Seattle


  • With a 2 year deal they don't think he is the future. They are taking a flyer out on him, but they aren't committing to him. They paid to much to get him. Starting to wonder if these guys know what they are doing. At this rate we will probably get trade our 6th and a pick next year for Marshall.
    User avatar
    razor150
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1815
    Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:22 am


  • The more I think about it, the more I think we've been utterly hosed.

    Man, that's expensive as hell. Wow. Dropping from 40 to 60 seems huge if we were going to wait for an OT or a safety.

    :vomit:
    “We need to be challenged, ... and we need to be under the gun to respond.” --Pete Carroll
    User avatar
    nanomoz
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4608
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:20 pm
    Location: UT


  • Hawkstorian wrote:
    chihawk wrote:The thing that is particularly strange with this is the report that we are signing him to a 2-year deal. If they think he is the future QB for the team, why would this only be a 2-year deal?


    That's the thing. We've given up high draft picks for only 2 years of a guy who won't even start the first year.


    Maybe it's a two-year extension to the tender he signed...making it at least a three-year deal. If not and Matt ends up starting this year, they plan on handing it over to Charlie when he has one year left....This makes no sense whatsoever.
    User avatar
    chihawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 369
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:38 pm


  • It is only 2 years to make sure he is as good as they think and if he is he will get a new deal. I love the trade because they are gonna trade Rob Sims for another draft choice. :3-1:
    bighawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 556
    Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 11:44 am


  • nanomoz wrote:The more I think about it, the more I think we've been utterly hosed.

    Man, that's expensive as hell. Wow. Dropping from 40 to 60 seems huge if we were going to wait for an OT or a safety.

    :vomit:


    Or a DT.

    Our offseason position is getting worse all the time.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11258
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • I wonder if this could be a sign that we're looking to trade back in the 1st since apparently we've given up on getting Bradford or Clausen with the 6?
    Image
    User avatar
    Mckinja
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 2797
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:31 am
    Location: Auburn, WA


Next


It is currently Wed Sep 17, 2014 7:35 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE ARCHIVES ]




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest